This order directs the executing authority to dispose of a pending representation regarding the restoration of seniority for an Agriculture Officer expeditiously, without examining the merits of the disputed case.
First respondent directed to pass appropriate orders on the representation dated 07.06.2018 expeditiously in accordance with law.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI Writ Petition No.19457 of 2019
Order :
This writ petition is filed for the following relief:
‘……to declare the action of the respondents in not considering the case of the petitioner for restoration of seniority from the date of commencement of the probation of the petitioner i.e., 15.02.1991 in the cadre of Agriculture Officer is highly illegal, arbitrary’.
The case of the petitioner is that, he belongs to schedule caste community; he was appointed as Agriculture Officer on 27.01.1991 and posted as Mandal Agriculture Officer, Ananthagiri, Visakhapatnam; he was further promoted as Assistant Director of Agriculture in the year 2013 and posted at Paderu; the second respondent issued proceedings, dated 03.12.1994, placing the petitioner on probation in the category of Agriculture Officer from 15.02.1991; further directed that during the period of probation, the petitioner should be on duty within a continuous period of three years; as the proceedings were issued on 03.12.1994, the period of three years stipulated there under commencing from 15.02.1991 had already expired; hence, the question of the petitioner passing the departmental tests within that period does not arise; treating the same as failure on the part of the petitioner, the respondents altered the date of commencement of the probation w.e.f. 17.11.1998 instead of 15.02.1991; subsequently, the petitioner passed the Departmental tests; thereafter, one Smt.V.Bramarambha was promoted as Agriculture Officer on 27.08.1996 and promoted as
2
Assistant Director of Agriculture on 08.10.2011; after coming to know that the said Bramarambha was far junior to him in the category of Agriculture Officer, the petitioner made a representation to the second respondent to consider his case on par with Smt.V.Bramarambha; without considering the case of the petitioner, the said Bramarambha was reverted as Agriculture Officer on 29.04.2013 by the second respondent; upon that the said Bramarambha filed O.A.No.3715 of 2013 before the A.P.Administrative Tribunal, and the Tribunal set aside the reversion orders; pursuant to the Orders of the Tribunal, the said Bramarambha was promoted as Assistant Director of Agriculture; he made a representation on 07.06.2018 to the first respondent requesting him to restore his seniority w.e.f. 15.02.1991, in the category of Agriculture Officer; basing on the said representation, the first respondent has issued memo, dated 25.06.2018, requesting the second respondent to examine the said representation and furnish a detailed report for taking further action in the matter; pursuant to the memo of the first respondent, the second respondent addressed a letter, dated 01.04.2019, to the first respondent, stating that the seniority review case of Smt.V.Bramarambha is still under examination of the government and the said O.A., is still pending.
Learned Government Pleader for Agriculture, appearing for the respondents submits that appropriate action would be taken on the representation, dated 07.06.2018 of the petitioner.
3
In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, without going into the merits of the case, if the representation made by the petitioner, dated 07.06.2018 is still pending before the first respondent, the first respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders thereon, strictly in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible.
Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.
KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI, J.
Date: 03.12.2019 BL
4
THE HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI
Writ Petition No. 19457 of 2019
Dated : 03.12.2019
BL
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the first respondent is directed to dispose of the pending representation seeking restoration of seniority immediately.
Whether the writ court should examine the merits of the seniority dispute without going into detailed facts.
Petitioner
Respondents (G.I.A., Dept. of Agriculture)
Kongara Vijaya Lakshmi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
